Today's very boring topic- How many dimensions are there?"Through the Wormhole" (with Morgan Freeman, but no penguins) was an exploration of trying to determine if there are more (or less) than 3 dimensions. Most of the theories revolved around trying to unify gravity with the other 3 forces (strong nuclear, weak nuclear, and elctro-magnetic), and why gravity is so much weak than the others.

One example was a theory that the reason gravity is the weakest of the 4 forces is that it is concentrated in a tiny 4th dimension and only influences our 3 due to closed loops colliding into each other. Because the 4th dimension is so much smaller, when it 'leaks out' to our 3 dimensions, it is basically 'diluted.'

A different theory about a 4th dimension involves dark matter. Our universe doesn't have enough observable matter to make sense of how it acts. From what we can see, the Milky Way should be flying apart like an exploding, spinning wheel. This theory says that in the early universe there was enough energy for some matter to slip into the 4th dimension, where it still exerts force, but needs immense energy to see (more on that below).

They also got into 9 dimensional string theory- essentially, mater is composed of 'strings' that have an extra 6 dimensions that vibrate so quickly we cannot detect them. The Large Hadron Collider is trying to detect string by blowing things up, but it was estimated to reveal the extra 6 dimensions in a particle accelerator, the accelerator would need to be about as big as our galaxy.

A further posit is that the strings are not just loose, but they are all connected to a universe-wide construct called a D-brane. A D-brane is something like a box matrix in 3 dimensions, and the strings attached their ends to it. However, gravitons (theoretical particles that carry the gravity force) are closed loop structures, and thus cannot attach to the D-brane. This would be why gravity is so weak.

The final bit was that everything may all just be one dimensional. All matter that is around us would actually be a collection of 1 dimensional lines that are clumped together.

So- what do you think? More than 3 dimensions, crazy gravity dimensions, (shut up you stupid monkey)?

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

Not going to lie....man, I'm so ignorant when it comes to subjects like cosmology and astronomy. I find it all very interesting though, and I do research things of other worldly matter in my spare time.

Azathoth, I have no clue what you just said, but who knows? Maybe I'll learn from the upcoming posts?

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

I've heard a very interesting theory that there are an infinite number of parallel dimensions, all occupying the same time and space, only on different frequencies just outside of our sensory ability to perceive.

The theory basically states that while you're sitting there, watching some tube, noshing on chips and sucking down on Mountain Dew, a stampede of dinosaurs are barreling through right in front of you in the same space and time, but you don't see them because they're in a parallel dimension just out of our sensory perception.

The theory also posits that if you could "tune" your senses like a radio dial to the specific wavelength, you'd be able to see and hear these parallel dimensions, too. This is a theory that's also found in paranormal research -- that a ghost isn't a "spirit" so much as one's intangible essence, which shifts into another dimension at the time of death but is subject to variations in dimensional frequencies and wavelengths, and occasionally finds itself "dipping" in and out of our dimension as certain of those frequencies shift and alternate.

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

Ha...nice. I'm a fan of this topic. If there's one thing I like more than horror movies (which, there are a couple), it's physics. In fact, anyone who's been paying attention to my Facebook today knows that, at the moment, I'm teaching myself Tensor Calculus, which is the mathematical basis of General Relativity.

Personally, I've come to believe that the universe has 4 dimensions - in a little more extreme manner than Relativity, even.As far as Relativity is concerned, the four dimensions are divided among 3 spatial and 1 temporal. However, my opinion is that all four dimensions are spatial... we just experience one as "time" because we are three-dimensional beings moving through that four-dimensional space.

As for the multiple dimensions of String Theory - there are 5 variations, and they involve between 4 and 11 dimensions. M-Theory is intended to be a generalization of all superstring variations, believing that they are all different aspects of a single model, and it's the current goal of String Theorists. However, I don't agree with String Theory, so, as far as I'm concerned, the point is moot.

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

What about the Tau versus Pi debate? I realize that is a math problem, but science of any sort has math integrated into it. In short, there is a movement to replace Pi (3.14) with Tau (6.28). To keep this simple I will not explain why exactly, only that Tau makes things much easier for serious equations.

And as far as multiple dimensions go, I full believe in the Infinite Universes idea. Sometime while dreaming I truly believe I exist as another version of myself in an alternate dimension. There is a complexity and continuity in my dream state that doesn't seem to follow normal dream interpretation and analysis. So I fully believe in the 4th dimension of time and 5th dimension of multi particle phase shifting between frequencies of existence.

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

Chrizzy wrote:

...Personally, I've come to believe that the universe has 4 dimensions - in a little more extreme manner than Relativity, even.As far as Relativity is concerned, the four dimensions are divided among 3 spatial and 1 temporal. However, my opinion is that all four dimensions are spatial... we just experience one as "time" because we are three-dimensional beings moving through that four-dimensional space.....

This was an aspect of the previous time/matter post that really didn't get brought up. Basically, every instant is a freeze frame in 3D, sort of like running film through a projector. Which would lead to can we move back and forth in the 4th D? (I never got as far as tensors in actual math, so I have to approximate the equations) Also, could this tie into Lon's idea above about parallel universes? If we are in one 'stream,' would there be a way to 'step over' to another stream?

These are more conceptual ideas than math workings, since I'm not going to impose even Dif Eq's on people. Nice to know that there other freaky sci/physics people out there (no Lon, Dog, Howdy, etc. I didn't forget about you).

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

The thing with parallel realities, and multiple universes, and the like, is that I prefer to stick to what we can observe. If there's something we observe that can only be explained by invoking multiple dimensions or parallel universes, then I would be fine with that. But, where we stand now, there is nothing to scientifically suggest anything of the sort. So, I keep to within four dimensions (whether we consider those a mix of spatial and temporal, or whether we consider them all spatial).

The only thing currently in Quantum Mechanics that might be interpreted as involving extra dimensions is Entanglement ("spooky action at a distance"). But, I would reject such an interpretation, considering that Entanglement is predicted within the bounds of purely four-dimensional Quantum Mechanics.

Though, speaking of Entanglement, and considering moving back and forth in time... if anyone doesn't already know about the Delayed-Choice Quantum Eraser experiment, I would seriously consider they look it up. It's a particularly fascinating issue introduced by Entanglement, and debates about what it means for how our observation affects reality can border on the philosophical.

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

He talks about perception, which is OK, but he forgets the reason that radio waves don't have 'color' is because our eyes don't pick that frequency up. However, the color blue has a specific wavelength (around 475 nanometers). If we wanted, we could assign 97.5FM the color 'Barsoom.' He kind of gets relativity correct, but does mess up the concept of time by forgetting to reference a viewer outside of the reference point. He does blows it on his 'eyes processing at the speed of light.' Human nerves only work at roughly 300 miles per hour- the brain interpolates a whole lot information in between each visual input.

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

Chrizzy wrote:

Though, speaking of Entanglement, and considering moving back and forth in time... if anyone doesn't already know about the Delayed-Choice Quantum Eraser experiment, I would seriously consider they look it up.

Gee, thanks, I just spent an hour relearning photonics, interference, and entanglement. Ouch. I do find the part about recovering the lost path information interesting (if I understood it correctly). I don't even want to get into the possible causality violations- then shit just gets straight up weird.

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

There are currently two issues with the Gravitational "constant". The first is determining whether or not it's actually constant with time. The second comes with the observation of large-scale structures at large (near-CMB) redshifts. These objects would, presumably, be within a few hundred million years after the "Big Bang," so the current Gravitational constant would seem to not be large enough to account for such a vast accumulation of matter in that short time. And we can't assume that the matter in the universe started out lumpy like that, because, of course, the CMB is uniform and isotropic to within a fraction of a percent, indicating that the universe, at that time, was just as uniform.This would suggest one of two things. It's possible that there's an unaccounted-for source of mass causing the excess gravitation (cold dark matter). This would require that about 70% of the mass in the universe be dark matter. But, even then, the limits of dark matter are being tested by the most recent discoveries, putting even larger-scale structures further and further back in time.The other possibility is that there is excess gravity - possibly indicating a larger Gravitational constant. Though, then we would need something to explain why gravity is so weak locally, as far as we experience it. This, too, can be solved in two ways: either a Gravitational "constant" that decreases with time, or a modified theory of gravity. The modified theory of gravity that works the best, which actually reproduces a number of cosmological anomalies, from the accelerating expansion of the universe to the Pioneer anomaly, is Scalar-Tensor-Vector Gravity (STVG), as described by John Moffat. It introduces a vector field akin to a fifth force, acting opposite to gravity and only over a distance of a light-year or two. It also introduces a stronger force of gravity, so that, within Solar Systems, the two forces counteract slightly, and the resultant force is what we experience as regular gravity. Beyond about a light-year, though, the repulsive force dissipates and the stronger force of gravity takes over.

So, unless some group of scientists somewhere has made a decision without my knowledge, this is the current state of the Gravitational constant. It's still up-in-the-air.

I think a more proper question is how do we define what a 'sense' is? There are theories that birds navigate via EM lines. We feel gravity, but is that really a 'touch' sense? If you close your eyes and touch you hand to your nose, how does it get there; you can's see your hand, you can't feel anything with your hand (well, passage of air, I guess), and unless you have a really stinky finger... in which case stay away from me!

Notice I'm not even talking about stuff like telepathy, telekinesis, etc. But we still can go into crazy land- is vision just the determinator for Schrodiner's Cat? Or could it be that we need consciousness to collapse the quantum wave to a determinate state? Would that be considered a 'sense?' Now, say a fly views the Cat, does is that a determination event? By most accounts, we do not view flies as being conscious.

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

I think that "sense" would be called "muscle memory."

You've touched your nose thousands of times. Your hand just automatically knows where to go. Muscle memory is really nothing more than a physical act informed by repetition. It's also why the more you play guitar the better you get, or the more you use a keyboard the faster and more accurately you type.

That aside, I do have some interest in the notion of certain people having a so-called "sixth sense," some of kind of abstract intuitiveness. Something like being able to see or hear various visual/audio wavelengths invisible to most people.

I dunno. I'll come back to this, because I haven't been up very long and the ol' brain juice ain't flowin' full stream just yet.

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

That's alright, I was never the best at statistics and probability either... or proofs. Unfortunately, I was tutoring a girl in math a few months ago, and one of the things we had to do was proofs. That was the opposite of fun.

As for senses... there seems to be a difference between the physical senses and quantum "senses".Physical senses are exactly what we know them to be, and they rely on the exchange of information through some sort of medium - nerves for touching, scent molecules for smelling, vibrations in the air for hearing, tastebuds on the tongue for tasting, and photons for seeing.The quantum definition of "senses", however, seems to have more of a detection-based nature. Does the existence of information affect the outcomes, or does the observation of that information? The delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment seems to indicate that its the observation of such information... which is a confusing result. But, then, other experiments suggest that it's the mere POSSIBILITY of the information being observed that affects the results, which is stranger still.

Even with all of the work I've done in trying to understand the quantum world, I still can't make sense of this aspect. It's a weird world we live in. Really, it is.

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

LoudLon wrote:

I've heard a very interesting theory that there are an infinite number of parallel dimensions, all occupying the same time and space, only on different frequencies just outside of our sensory ability to perceive.

The theory basically states that while you're sitting there, watching some tube, noshing on chips and sucking down on Mountain Dew, a stampede of dinosaurs are barreling through right in front of you in the same space and time, but you don't see them because they're in a parallel dimension just out of our sensory perception.

The theory also posits that if you could "tune" your senses like a radio dial to the specific wavelength, you'd be able to see and hear these parallel dimensions, too. This is a theory that's also found in paranormal research -- that a ghost isn't a "spirit" so much as one's intangible essence, which shifts into another dimension at the time of death but is subject to variations in dimensional frequencies and wavelengths, and occasionally finds itself "dipping" in and out of our dimension as certain of those frequencies shift and alternate.

Re: The Science-y Stuff Thread

LoudLon wrote:

That aside, I do have some interest in the notion of certain people having a so-called "sixth sense," some of kind of abstract intuitiveness. Something like being able to see or hear various visual/audio wavelengths invisible to most people.